gam@amdahl.UUCP (gam) (02/09/85)
> ... Unemployment is a poltical problem, not an > economic fact. That it remains is evidence of lack of > political will to solve it. I don't think we should argue any further, then. I see unemployment as an economic problem. Politicizing it usually makes it worse. -- Gordon A. Moffett ...!{ihnp4,hplabs,sun}!amdahl!gam
mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor) (02/14/85)
>> ... Unemployment is a poltical problem, not an >> economic fact. That it remains is evidence of lack of >> political will to solve it. > >I don't think we should argue any further, then. I see unemployment >as an economic problem. Politicizing it usually makes it worse. >-- >Gordon A. Moffett ...!{ihnp4,hplabs,sun}!amdahl!gam There are two levels of problem here: Whether "unemployment" is itself undesirable is a political problem; if it is truly undesirable its solution is an economic problem. If (note conditional) technology makes it more effective for most businesses to automate processes that previously used manpower, they won't hire as many people (the increased profits probably won't lead to an offsetting increase in company size). If we (society) want the cheaper goods, we should encourage the laid-off people to not-work (which amounts to being unemployed). There is a technical question as to whether technology will lead to massive unemployment, or merely wrenching dislocation (temporary unemployment of masses of people). McK thinks one way, Baba another, and there are lots of people on both sides. But it is a POLITICAL question whether it is better to get these unemployed people working, or to get greater overall production at a given cost (which cost includes welfare payments). If the latter solution is chosen, unemployment ceases to be an economic problem. -- Martin Taylor {allegra,linus,ihnp4,floyd,ubc-vision}!utzoo!dciem!mmt {uw-beaver,qucis,watmath}!utcsrgv!dciem!mmt